Perez v. Henneberry et al
| Isabelle Perez |
| Joan (I) Henneberry, Joan Henneberry, Gary (I) H. Ashby and Gary H. Ashby |
| 1:2009cv01681 |
| July 15, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Denver Office |
| Jefferson |
| John L. Kane |
| Craig B. Shaffer |
| None |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1396 - Tort Negligence |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
153
ORDER granting 149 Stipulated Motion to Dismiss WITH PREJUDICE. Each party shall be responsible for her or its own costs and attorneys fees. by Judge William J. Martinez on 8/1/2011.(erv, )
|
|
Filing
147
ORDER granting 146 Joint Motion for Publication of this Courts April 26, 2011 Order. by Judge William J. Martinez on 7/6/2011.(erv, )
|
|
Filing
143
Minute Entry for Final Trial Preparation Conference held before Judge William J. Martinez on June 2, 2011: ORDERED:Plaintiff's Motion to Allow Plaintiff's Witness Sylvius H. Von Saucken to Testify by Telephone 129 is DENIED. Sylvius H. V on Saucken shall appear in person, and he will not be allowed to testify contrary to the Court's Order on the Motions for Summary Judgment 112 , and the Court's Order on Defendants' Rule 702 motion 113 . ORDERED:Given the extensive briefing of the issues in this case, trial briefs will not be permitted. ORDERED:The parties shall ensure, in all future filings, that the caption of the case reflects the individual Defendants are in the case in their official capacity only.(Court Reporter: Gwen Daniel) (wjmcd, )
|
|
Filing
141
ORDER granting 127 Defendants' Motion for Leave to Amend Final Pretrial Order, and granting 128 Plaintiff's Partially Unopposed Motion to Amend Final Pretrial Order. The Court accepts the proposed amendments enumerated in the partis' respective motions. By Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 6/1/2011. (mehcd)
|
|
Filing
113
ORDER denying 104 Defendants Motion Under Fed. R. Evid. 702 by Judge William J. Martinez on 5/5/2011.(erv, )
|
|
Filing
80
MINUTE ORDER granting 76 Motion for Leave. Supplement to First Amended Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is accepted for filing. Defendants may file a brief response to the supplement, if they wish, not later than Monday, November 29, 2010. Entered by Chief Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 11/8/10. (wydcd, rrk)
|
|
Filing
63
ORDER Denying as moot 59 Defendants Motion for Protective Order by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 8/25/2010.(erv, )
|
|
Filing
45
MINUTE ORDER granting 43 Plaintiffs Unopposed Motion to File First Amended Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, and Under Seal 43 . Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment attached to the pending motion is accepted for filing under seal. Defendants response to the amended motion for summary judgment shall be filed not later than May 10, 2010. Additionally, Plaintiffs first motion for summary judgment 35 is DENIED AS MOOT. by Chief Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 4/16/2010.(erv, )
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 16 Defendants Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Claims Brought Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The motion is granted to the extent that Plaintiffs § 1983 claim asserted under § 1396p(d)(4)(A) is DISMISSED. The motion is DENIED in all other respects. by Chief Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 4/12/2010.(erv, )
|
|
Filing
11
ORDER OF RECUSAL. Magistrate Judge Shaffer recused. Clerk to assign another magistrate judge by random draw. By Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer on 08/04/2009. (sah, )
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
